you'll have to excuse me if I don't get too worked up about an RC helicopter with a GoPro...

Over time, as they continue become more advanced, we might happily find that they haven't lead to any problematic issues. I wouldn't bet on that but we'll see. I also suspect people could by necessity generally become more aware of the limitations of property and air rights because of these things.

It's interesting. For a few hundred bucks anyone can see what everyone else in the neighborhood has behind their backyard fence. And when they leave, it's up for grabs (we'll have to jam their home security drone first). No more private nude sunbathing, ladies. Also handy for private detectives following philandering spouses, insurance fraud cases, etc. This will be great.

you'll have to excuse me if I don't get too worked up about an RC helicopter with a GoPro...

I wonder how long until we see someone or some group like the Tsarnaevs utilize relativity cheap but rapidly advancing devices like these to enhance the effectiveness of a future deadly attack operation on a heavily populated event or location?

It's interesting. For a few hundred bucks anyone can see what everyone else in the neighborhood has behind their backyard fence. And when they leave, it's up for grabs (we'll have to jam their home security drone first). No more private nude sunbathing, ladies. Also handy for private detectives following philandering spouses, insurance fraud cases, etc. This will be great.

I wonder how long until we see someone or some group like the Tsarnaevs utilize relativity cheap but rapidly advancing devices like these to enhance the effectiveness of a future deadly attack operation on a heavily populated event or location?

It's interesting. For a few hundred bucks anyone can see what everyone else in the neighborhood has behind their backyard fence. And when they leave, it's up for grabs (we'll have to jam their home security drone first). No more private nude sunbathing, ladies. Also handy for private detectives following philandering spouses, insurance fraud cases, etc. This will be great.

Right. It's odd to me how people get so worked up over UAVs but not drones that are more commonly known as robots just because they happen to be ground vehicles. Why is one so much worse than the other? Either can be misused easily. (The movie Robocop comes to mind for ground-based drones).

3D - Property rights on the ground vs. air rights

Originally Posted by nate

Right. It's odd to me how people get so worked up over UAVs but not drones that are more commonly known as robots just because they happen to be ground vehicles. Why is one so much worse than the other? Either can be misused easily. (The movie Robocop comes to mind for ground-based drones).

There's another dimension of complexity involved with UAVs versus earth-bound robots and vehicles. If you, as a private citizen, drive a spying robot onto my property I can disable or destroy it. If you fly a spying UAV over my property but maneuver it to no closer than 500' from any structures on my property I can't legally do anything. If I take down your UAV in that circumstance you could report me for vandalizing your UAV (your property) and I would be legally liable.

There's another dimension of complexity involved with UAVs versus earth-bound robots and vehicles. If you, as a private citizen, drive a spying robot onto my property I can disable or destroy it. If you fly a spying UAV over my property but maneuver it to no closer than 500' from any structures on my property I can't legally do anything. If I take down your UAV in that circumstance you could report me for vandalizing your UAV (your property) and I would be legally liable.

So if I attach a scope with a rangefinder to my shotgun and, while aiming, find that a flying drone is inside of the 500' limit I am justified in opening fire on said drone?

Of course, I'll have some type of recording device plugged into said scope recording said encounter.

the article says nothing more than a "helicopter". you assume the type.

the police have been using those for decades obviously...I don't really see any difference.

If you're referring to the Slate article about Boston, you're incorrectly inferring something that I wasn't saying at all. Helicopters are very different animals from micro UAVs. I seen the comparison drawn between the two recently and I find it to be specious.

The point of interest to me in the article, because it shows how law enforcement is utilizing technology, is that they used ground traversing robots and a thermal camera. A micro UAV with a thermal camera probably could have performed the same task as the robots and police helicopter/s.

As I understand it from what I've read, as long as it's legal to shoot there and the privately owned micro UAV is within the 500' range, you should be in no trouble at all. The FAA is still trying to figure out the regulations for these things and running behind schedule so things are still largely up in the air (no pun intended).